The World's Most Expensive Loudspeakers
The World’s Most Expensive Loudspeakers
Robert Harley
There’s been much debate in the pages of The Absolute Sound lately about the high-cost of certain audio components. For some reason, Wilson Audio seems to be a lightning rod for those who think some high-end products are overpriced. They point to the $158,000 Wilson X-2 as “Exhibit A.”
But is the X-2 the most expensive speaker in the world? Or even among the top ten?
Not by a long shot. In fact, by my count there are 35 speakers more expensive than the X-2. Here’s a brief and informal survey of the world’s most expensive loudspeakers.
At the top of the list is the Transmission Audio Ultimate, a $2,000,000 system custom-built to order. The Ultimate uses a custom 2”-wide ribbon that is 21” tall, coupled with cone woofers.
At just half the price (one million dollars), Kharma offers the Grand Enigma, only one of which has been sold.
The next step down takes us to the $700,000 Wisdom Audio Infinite Grand, a four-piece package that mates a 3” by 75” planar-magnetic midrange-tweeter to woofer cabinets housing 24 12” woofers that reportedly extend to 5Hz. Total system weight: Two tons.
The sub-$500k category begins with the powered California Audio Technology (CAT) MBX system that looks like a conventional loudspeaker on steroids. The MBX, which I’ve seen on passive display at CES, is without a doubt the largest non-sound-reinforcement loudspeaker I’ve seen. The MBX is about the same size and shape as the pillars that hold up freeway overpasses.
$380,700 will get you the Acapella Audio Arts Sphaeron Excalibur. This speaker combines two enormous woofer columns (each housing four 15” woofers) with large horn-loaded midrange and tweeter units. Sensitivity is a whopping 100dB 1W/1m.
Sixth on our list is the Magico Ultimate at $354,000, another horn-loaded system. The Ultimate features true horn-loading down to 120Hz, which requires the massive aluminum horn that dominates the Ultimate.
Adam Audio of Germany offers the Olympus Sound System (OSS) at $340,000 a pair. The four module (per side) system includes an array of the company’s proprietary ribbon tweeters flanking an array of ribbon midranges in separate enclosures that are then attached to the woofer columns. The stand-alone subwoofer column houses two 18” drivers driven by an integral 1000W amplifier. The OSS uses DSP crossovers with time and amplitude correction.
At $322,000 we have the Tidal T-1, a four-piece system that claims to use pure silver crossovers. The main tower is built from three separate modules that can be time-aligned. The T-1 can be driven passively or actively with the included line-level crossover. Weight: 1.2 tons per side.
In the next installment of this blog, I’ll continue down the list of the world’s most expensive loudspeakers. Warning: We’ve got a long way to go before we get to the Wilson X-2.
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Comments
That's pretty amazing. I know a lot of musicians who would perform every week for you for the rest of your life for that serious coin.
Do you have any pictures of these exotic speakers? It would make for quite a slide-show.
Thanks,
Jim
http://www.higherfi.com/spkrlist/speakerlist.htm
If i had the cash or won the Lotto i would buy the Adam OSS, most ferraris have a 2 year waiting list. You don't just pay for the cost of build, you are also paying for R&D, tooling costs, employee entitlements and the rest . Have a look at this site for some pictures of the above, http://www.higherfi.com/spkrlist/speakerlist.htm it will blow your budget.
As a confirmed audiophile and analog nut I stand in awe of the advancements in all areas of our hobbie. I aspire to accurate and musical sound. Unfortunately my wallet will not allow me to chase the elusive best of the best. As a TAS subsciber from issue 5 I have used the toughtful and witty articles to plan out my long term audio investments. My fellow readers and audiophiles understand that we may not be able to lay out 100k+ for loud speakers but in most all areas a trickle down effect does occur. Technologies advance and economies of scale can and have brought amazing sound to us at bargain basement prices. At the very least if one bids their time some of these gems can hit the secondary markets and be snapped up as well. As echoed buy many others if only I could hit that lotto or some unknown rich relative think of me in their will, I would be all over the country listening and planning my dream system which thanks to TAS and others I have a clear idea in my head that which I would listen to first.
Cheers to all and good luck building your dream system that brings that live music sound into your space!
Robert--this is very useful. The X-2 is, of course, a mere piker in the cost department, as you show, when contrasted with these other loudspeakers, a number of which can be viewed at HigherFi.com, if I remember correctly.
I suspect that in ten years, however, the cost of even these loudspeakers will not seem quite as great as it does now. If we extrapolate on a straight line basis from where prices were a decade ago, the Wilson X-2 may come to look like a mid-priced speaker, if costs continue to rise. By then $100,000 would, in other words, buy you the equivalent of today's $50,000 loudspeaker, though performance would presumably also have improved across the board.
Already it is not uncommon to see preamps retailing for $15-$35K. A decade from now a high-end preamp could well go for $50-$70k. And so on.
Jacob H.
I hope that Jacob's observation doesn't come to pass. There are encouraging signs of improving performance for less money. A couple of examples: B&W just overhauled their 800 series and gave every one of them (even the $5000 per pair 805) diamond tweeters. Usher just released a new version of their Tiny Dancer with diamond tweeters and increased the price from $2795 per pair to $2995 per pair. I'm reviewing right now the Wilson Sasha, which is considerably better than any WATT/Puppy and it's priced slightly lower than the WP8.
The more affordable great sound is, the better for everyone---music lovers, manufacturers, retailers, and magazines.
Hi Robert:
So do I. But I suspect that the extreme upper-end will continue to become more expensive even as the benefits trickledown. Won't it require increasingly exotic materials to fashion even better capacitors and to extract more performance?
Also the acquisitive instinct--the desire for more expensive products--surely will not go away. I've recently become acquainted with the term "hedonic treadmill." There are a number of recent studies examining why we often quickly become dissatisfied with recent purchases and seek out an even pricier or more luxurious one. Even as the national incomes of American (or Europeans) goes up, studies indicate that they are no happier than their forebears.
Robert, how about a trip to the makers for some photos and 1st impressions.
Regardless of the other more expensive speakers, it doesn't make Wilson pricing any better. Wilsons are still priced out of this world for only a select few in the entire world. Our country is in trillion dollar debts, most part of the world is dirt poor. And yet it's ok to call Wilson pricing fair? It shouldn't even be part of the generalized audio products. It's a specialty item. And should be treated like that. When you go to car shows the ferraris, Ashton martins, bentley are on display with ropes around them or in glass. Only a rare few can get to sit in the car or touch it to check it out. Audio products should be the same when the pricing is equal to a house. I audition them out of curiosity but have absolutely no fascination or praise or lust over such products. They are stupid expensive. I have extremely high respect for Robert Harley and I think he is one of the audio greats but I disagree with him that products like these deserve celebration. I just cannot come to grips with this insanity in my mind no matter what way I try to reason it.
This is fun - in the sort of way that reading about the Ferrari Enzo and Bugatti Veyron is fun, if way beyond my grasp. But at some point, I wonder what is real and what is just big-boys' dreams. Almost anyone can build a one-off, take some pictures, claim it the world's best (who'd know for sure?) and advertize it as a real product on-line. Having established sales of at least a few units would seem to me to be necessary to qualify these beasts as real. Wilson has probably sold more than a few X-2s, and probably leads the big guns sales race. Excuse me, but I have to get back to the garage where I'm bolting together four V-8s to make a V-32, the most powerful street car engine in the world. Nyah-Nyah, mine is bigger than yours :)
It's interesting to note that when Wilson launched the X-1, they were back-ordered for 18 months.
Excellent article - or should I say teaser. That is to say all of us would enjoy a further dive into the depths (heights) of loudspeaker design. Both ends of the audiophile price range have their place - the ultimate cost no object creations that allow the state of the art to move forward, and the bang for the buck products that allow us to sample a taste of the divine.
Those who protest high priced products, or sneer at modest offerings miss the point. The industry, and music lovers need both.
My suggestion? An article devoted to a 'started there - wound up here' look at trickle down speaker technology. Yes, you can do this for other components, but speakers seem to offer more examples.
mine may not be the most expensive, but mine are exclusive!
only these 3 in the world.
special made by b&w for abbey road studio 1.
the only b&w808 abbey road in the world.
for pictures,see:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8170508@N02/page2/
To address Sam's point, I know that he's looking at the Berkeley Alpha DAC ($5000). He might have already bought one. To the average person, $300 is a lot of money for a full CD player. It's all relative.
Funny story. My UPS man knows what I do for a living, and was waiting to buy a DVD player. This was several years ago, and when the Faroudja processing that once cost $10,000 in a stand-alone box was put on a chip and incorporated into a $169 Philips DVD player, I told him to buy it. It was a stunning advance.
The next time he delivered to my house he complained to me that the player didn't include cables: "For that kind of money, you expect to get cables."
Robert, With all due respect. Like I said these are specialty items. Even if I could afford a $300,000 speaker I would find it hard to reason with it mentally. Just like a $300,000 pen or computer or a car sounds insane to me regardless of relativeness or affordability. For a house or certain boats I could still think of it in that terms. Its like a billion dollar 747, id find that odd too. The Berkeley Alpha DAC at $5000 is Very Expensive by all means. And I didn't justify its pricing or say its resonable because I could potentially afford it. I know we are going in circles and I don't want to argue for the sake of just arguing.......Im just shaking my head in awe with some of these products. You are in the buisness so you surely know better. While I continue to wonder how can a speaker cost $300,000 and how many or who buy it. The UPS guys analogy is on the other extreme end. His comment on expecting to get free cables with $169 DVD is also a cause of shaking my head in awe. lol. An on the street homeless begger might say that the guy at walmart making $10 an hour has an amazing job and is super rich and while its relative, I could still understand it or reason with it or this type of thinking. On the other hand, the CEO's of the top Auto companies arriving in their private planes to ask for gov't help from Tax payers money to prevent them from bankruptsy is insane to my mind. I could also not reason the fact that once they got that bailout money from the government/taxpayers, the top execs were still getting million dollar paychecks....their pay is relative....but ...... somethings I just find it hard to reason with.
Robert,
This should remind us of the disparity which we in the hobbie/profession take for granted. Did'nt all components just a few years ago come with the standard rca interconnects. I understand that no manufacturer can include all the assorted cable combinations (s video, optical, component, hdmi, usb, etc.) but I bet most consumers are still blown away that they must then return to the store to pick up interconnects for $45.00 much less the idea of dropping hundreds or thousands of dollars on them.
Cheers,
Alan
As a professional recording engineer specializing in acoustic music, mostly classical and jazz, I have salivated over some of the high end offerings in speakers and amps. But reality wins out in the long run, and I must put my money into fine microphones and preamps which are not nearly as costly in comparison..., AND they make money for me, which means they pay for themselves.
My high end buying takes a rear position in the line as I often buy something that was praised in the past, as exceptional, from a person who has to have the latest and greatest. My whole reference system is made up of used stuff.., Linn, Counterpoint, Conrad Johnson, Moscode, Magnepan, Martin Logan, Tannoy etc. I have also learned that a few inexpensive tweaks to these pieces can make a huge difference. The one new piece purchased is a Cambridge Audio 640C V2 CD player..., got it at blow out price because there was a newer model introduced.., not that it was that expensive at full price. The British mags tauted it as one of the best and it does sound awsome indeed.
Folks like David Hafler, Frank Van Alstine and, of course, Jim Winey of Magnepan have offered quality audio components for years at less than yacht purchasing prices. NAD and Parasound also have reasonable offerings and Cambridge Audio is right in there with them. It can be done and doesn't have to cost a fortune as if to suggest that only the "rich" have ears good enough to enjoy such sound.
I'm not buyin' anything so heavy I can't carry it out of my house if there's a fire! I guess that excludes my brother, too...except I didn't buy him. He arrived free (well, not to mom and dad).
It would fascinate me more to see into the minds of the creators of these hugely expensive products to see if they truly believe that this is the best product money can buy. And if it isn't why they designed it. I mean, what does it do that something that's, say, $15,000 doesn't do (talkin' about speakers here only). For $2,000,000 it should sound 1000% (not merely 100%, but 1000%) real. But it can't, because perfect sound does not yet exist, does it? So, there must be a rationale for putting this price tag on it, and I really am interested in the "why."
I have tremendous respect for Mr Harley and everyone here who has pursued this hobby knowing full well that everything is relative, that our passion for musical perfection takes us on a lifelong quest and that most everything in this world is compromised in one way or another. For anyone to attempt to design and execute what he considers "ultimate" is praiseworthy but how he prices his creation is altogether another matter. Here is where his true character becomes apparent. A Ferrari is beyond reach even for the entry-level rich but it has prospered because buyers and non-buyers have found the price-to-performance ratio justified. Time will tell which of these ultimate speakers are justified and which ones are public displays of extreme narcissism.
"Speaking of huge, the ADAM Audio Olympus Sound System was every bit as impressive sonically as its physical dimensions would suggest. As physically imposing as the system looked, the overall size and scale of the music was actually as realistic as one could summon at a trade show. This is the art of making a loudspeaker disappear no matter its girth."
(Clement Perry, The Stereo Times)
"Speaking of huge, the ADAM Audio Olympus Sound System was every bit as impressive sonically as its physical dimensions would suggest. As physically imposing as the system looked, the overall size and scale of the music was actually as realistic as one could summon at a trade show. This is the art of making a loudspeaker disappear no matter its girth."
(Clement Perry, The Stereo Times)
Aside from the Acapella, they are the most ugliest speakers going, the lot of them. Surely Aesthetics comes into this too?
Robert, Apart from expensive how good it rates in the Performance rankings.
It's been my experience that these mega-speakers often not only don't live up to expectations, they are uninvolving musically. It's much harder to get a massive, complex system to work than it is to make a more modest effort sound musical. Still, when everything is right with one of these systems, it can be transcendental.
Add the Wilson line to that list, and you will understand some of us complain.
Robert,
Is there in your experience a point of diminished return when you push the uber system envelope and suddenly the only thing that sounds worth a damn on it is a narrow field of music that has been recorded just so, ala direct to disc, master tape and the like. It seems to me as a system becomes so accurate at resolution that it could actually drive the content of music choices down and not up! Could the more realistic and affordable resolution gain for the average audiophile without the means to chase the uber system be the advancement of the recording and source?
Alan
This point often comes up but in my experience things that are really good in the way of playback tend to make most recordings sound good, or at least better than they would otherwise. Of course there may be a frustration factor at how good the good recordings sound and why can't I have that all the time! But in absolute terms, bad recordings ought also to sound better with better playback. Less distortion and smoother response tend to make everything sound better.
I think the often expressed idea that this is not so arose because in times gone by High End equipment often had rather exaggerated top end in the interests of having "detail". In those days, it really was true that hardly anything sounded good on "good" equipment, or some of it at least. If a phono cartridge has a top end up by 7 dB, yes, indeed, you have better be careful what you play using it!!
But now when good equipment--or what I would call good equipment anyway--has real detail rather than fake detail from exaggerated top end, I find that good equipment tends to make all recordings sound better!
(Of course there is also the possibility of essentially transparent DSP processing which enables on to adjust balance--and that can be used to make almost anything sound better that needs help in that department. But that is another story)
Robert,
Thanks for leading an interesting discussion. As long as there is life, it seems, there will be bigger, better, more expensive gear, and yet the pursuit remains asymptotic--gear alone can't actually ever get us where we want to get in the experience of music! I recently made another investment in my system--some used Quad 2905s--and yes, they're great and all that, they sound better than what I had before, and yet so long as I'm focused on how they perform they, too, remain ultimately insufficient of themselves--until I let go of my audiophile preoccupations and surrender to what they CAN do! It seems unlikely I'll ever be in a position to own "the best", so I'm thinking that perhaps the point of the hobby has little to do with "owning" and more to do with "surrender".
Even so, my morbid curiosity has me agree with the request for some pictures, please!
MGM
Some of the really expensive speaker systems(or audio systems altogether) seem to me to offer a good bit more thought and ingenuity and general forward-lookingness than others. In this connection, I might mention a positive impression (listening included, not just theory, they have a demo room in Los Angeles) of the Lyngdorf/Steinway system--which incidentally really is a joint venture with Steinway the piano people.
This is large and impressive and elegant looking as one expects at the price. But it is also a design done with much thought for fundamental issues, and it included sophisticated DSP processing along with exceptional attention to acoustical-mechanical detail. It is a quite impressive piece of work and one can see where the money went anyway. And it sounds really good.